Talk:Aragon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Spain (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking Countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 

Comment[edit]

"In speaking of the reign of Henry IV, present-day historians usually call the kingdom the "Navarre-France Confederation" or, some of them, simply "Navarre-France," since it was the Navarre kings that inherited the French Crown and not the other way around." User:Wetman

In the text there is a confution between the Aragon Kingdom & the Corona de Aragón (I ignore the correct term in English). The first was independent under 1714 (fisrt under the power of the House of Barcelona and later under the power of the king of Spain) and never rules in Catalonia, Balearic Islands, Valencia... the second was the name of Aragon Kingdom, Catalonia, Balearic Islands.... under the power of the same person until 1492. Llull 19:50, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

The "Crown of Aragon" is the second term you're looking for. The first would be the "Kingdom of Aragon". So the crown of Aragon consisted of the Kingdom of Aragon, the Kingdom of Valencia, Catalonia (the County of Barcelona), the Balearic Islands (Kingdom of Majorca?), the Kingdom of Sardinia, and the two Sicilian kingdoms. The last three were lost by the treaties ending the War of the Spanish Succession, and the first four were incorporated more fully into a central Spanish administration, although I don't think it's accurate to say that there was a Kingdom of Spain until the Napoleonic intervention in the 19th century - there was no official title of "King of Spain" before that, although the term was used colloquially. john

Well, the term was used more that colloquially. "Juan el Hermoso" was who began to use this term. And yes, the Balearic Islands were the Kingdom of Majorca. I won't correct the differences between the crown and the Kingdom because of I'd introduce bugs. Llull 06:48, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
It may have been used, in the same way that James I and VI of England and Scotland called himself "King of Great Britain," but it was not an official title until 1808. I'm not sure what you mean about introducing bugs. john 06:56, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

At any rate, I think you're right that the article conflates the region of Aragon with the whole lands of the Aragonese Crown which were in personal union with Castile from 1479. Not sure how to deal with this. john 06:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Present-day historians usually call the kingdom the "Catalan-Aragonese Confederation" or, some of them, simply "Catalonia-Aragon". Barcelona was the center of what was in many ways a Mediterranean Empire, ruling the Mediterranean Sea and setting rules for the entire sea (for instances, in the Llibre del Consolat del Mar (in Catalan). There was never something as Catalonia-Aragon or the Catalan-Aragonese Confederation. The union between Aragon, Catalonia, Valencia and Majorca was allways called the "Corona de Aragón" (without any Catalonia in front or behind). I don't know who has introduced those other names in history books but I have my suspicions. As for Barcelona being the "center" of the "empire", well the union between the different kingdoms was quite loose. Valencia and Naples were very important trade cities too. To say that Barcelona was the center is simply wishful thinking. I think there is a tendency to project the importance of modern Barcelona into the past.

You are probably right there. Chameleon 12:18, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

While Barcelona was the center of the Crown of Aragon administration, it is true that links among Catalonia, Valencia and Aragon were very loose. This claim about the importance of Barcelona city is probably exaggerated and should be editted out, since it belongs better to Barcelona article. I suggest that history of the Crown of Aragon should be explained in Aragonese Empire while the relationship between Kingdom of Aragon and Crown of Aragon belongs here. IMHO, this would prevent confusion. --62.81.27.241 17:34, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 13:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Aragon (region) -> Aragon. IMHO this is the main meaning, as for instance, the United States. Toniher 14:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Support per nomination. LuiKhuntek 02:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Olessi 05:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name of Region[edit]

As I have been saying in other Spain-related pages, we should be putting as the official name ONLY the official name of the region. As Aragonese and Catalan and not recognized within Aragon, both of those names cannot be considered official.

Eboracum 02:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I am reverting the names of the Autonomous Community to only the official version. Will the user putting back unofficial names as if they were official please discuss why?

Eboracum 23:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

This article isn't neutral, someone try to rewrite the history to support their political ideas, but my english is very poor to correct it. Only one point, the map about languages isn't good, in all Aragon all people speak spanish and in some parts there are persons who speaks two languages, for example, spanish and catalonian. In fact, only spanish is the legal language of the Comunity of Aragón.

I agree there: The labeling of the map is misleading. There are regions of Aragon where two languages are spoken, but in all of them people speak Spanish. Would someone with the proper tool modify the map labeling, please? 128.195.88.18 06:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Pardon my ignorance of this matter, but I was under the assumption that in Spain, regional languages were given official status in areas where they were spoken, to the extent that even tiny languages like Aranes have official status (as can be seen on the page for Catalunya). Is Aragon an exception to this? Seek100 23:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Only if there is a law recognizing that official status in a first place. The "Ley de Lenguas de Aragon" (Language Law of Aragon) delimited official borders for catalan and aragones. It created a lot of polemic and wasn't even presented at the aragones parliament (DGA) for fear of it being turned down. The new "estatuto" (similar to a small constitution for a federal state), which will surely last for at least some 20-30 years mentions no borders. Indeed, it doesn't even mention "aragones" or "catalan"! It only mentions regional languages in generic. Attempts to solve this have been hampered by internal political fights. So, yes, Aragon is an exception to this.
There are several reasons to this. 1) some people trying to impose one monolithic version of aragones on all territory. 2) some tremendously small languages trying to get official status (benasqués, ribagorzano). 3) fights between supporters of "catalan in aragon" and supporters of "oriental aragones". 4) interference from catalonia to support "catalan in aragon", which causes more trouble than it solves. 5) "right" and "left" taking one side or other. 6) rivality between big cities and villages and between Catalonia and Aragon, and many, many, more reasons. It's going to be a long time before this gets settled. --Enric Naval 17:55, 14 July

2006 (UTC)

  • Spain is divided in Comunidades Autonomas, every Comunidad Autonoma have a Gobern and a Senate, then, every Comunidad Autonoma have proper laws. Anselmocisneros 18:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I´m from Aragon, and his Spanish name is Aragón, not Aragon.
While the comments in this section were true, the Aragonese Parliament has since passed a language law (Ley 10/2009, de 22 de diciembre, de uso, protección y promoción de las lenguas propias de Aragón), though they are taking their time in implementing it. The law did not go so far as to make Catalan and Aragonese official, but it did acnowledge that Aragon is trilingual, recognising Catalan and Aragonese as "native" languages (lenguas propias). I think this justifies using the Castilian, Catalan and Aragonese names. Once the Aragonese government decides to decide which areas are Catalan-speaking, Spanish-speaking, Aragonese-speaking and mixed, we might redraw the language map, but I imagine this will take a while. I'll try and keep an eye on the news.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Acomasga (talkcontribs) 15:08, 23 October 2010

Landscape[edit]

The "landscape" part of the article was obviously written by a spanish person with little grasp of english, and really needs a clean up, I have no real knowledge of aragorn so I just fixed the most outstanding errors such as the spelling of beautiful as "beautyfull" etc.

Aragorn is a very different thing :). 128.195.88.18 06:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

History section screwy[edit]

Someone has messed with the history section of this page, adding jokes about middle earth and other things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.223.19.3 (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Teruel existe[edit]

el articulo sobre Teruel, es muy reducido, ¿alguien con dominio del inglés lo puede ampliar?82.198.37.58 (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


About the languages of Aragon[edit]

Most of sources about this matter, only accept Catalan as spoken in a strip in the east of Aragon. No French, Gascon or Basque is spoken (nowadays!) in Aragon. Even the map only establish Spanish, Navarro-Aragonese and Catalan, as spoken languages in Aragon. The text is clearly ambiguous and essentially false--2deseptiembre (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Ramón y Cajal was born in Petilla de Aragón, Navarre[edit]

Ramón y Cajal was Navarrese, at least, by birth. Easy to demonstrate. Look the maps.--2deseptiembre (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Article Name[edit]

Surely this should be moved to Aragón as that is the official name? Jezhotwells (talk) 09:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

In English it's usually spelled without the accent, see a search in google books[1], where you can fin examples like the Enclyclopedia of the Middle Ages[2]. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
If I do a search using Aragón I find the same number of and the same books so I am not sure if that is meant to prove anything. Google ignores such accents. Historically, until very recently English ignored accents as they were difficult to implement in print and manuscripts were typed on typewriters that had no accents, but that situation has been completely superseded now with the widespread use of word processing programs. Any way I changed the red link to Bajo Aragon to Bajo Aragón so at least that is correct. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
(I didn't see this before) Sorry, I didn't make my point clear. I mean that, if you look at only the English language encyclopedias in that search, you'll see that they all use "Aragon" without accent. Among those first 10 results I can see: "The Encyclopedia of world history", "The Encyclopedia of world history", "New international encyclopedia", "The Cervantes Encyclopedia", "The Cervantes Encyclopedia" and "The Kingfisher History Encyclopedia".
If I search instead for history books[3], from the 50 results I get:
  • 46 English history books that do not use an accent,
  • 1 history book in English language that uses an accent in a person called "Vera y Aragón", and it was written by someone with a Spanish name
  • 1 English language book mentioning an author called "Louis Aragon" without accent ("French XX bibliography")
  • 1 English translation of The Quijote using no accent ("The History of Don Quixote")
  • 1 Spanish language history book that does use an accent ("Un viaje por la historia de los templarios en Espana").
On the next 50 results (in the second page) I can find even more English history books using no accent, like the 1911's edition of The encyclopædia britannica or "The Cambridge economic history of Europe". I can only find one Engish language book that uses accents, and it also uses the name without accent at many places, and it was written by two Catalan people and not by native English speakers ("The Jews in the Crown of Aragon").
About recent books using accents, note that, on the first 50 results, the first result was from 2007, the fourth was from 2005 and the tenth was from 2006, so it also includes recent works that should be able to print accents easily. I can limit the search of history books to those published in 2009 or later[4], and I still see no English language books that use an accent. I can also spot a French language books that doesn't an accent on Aragon, even although French language does have accents ("Al-Andalus/España: historiografías en contraste"). I can limit the search to books published in 2009 or later and that are from University presses[5] and I still can't find any English language history book that uses an accent on "Aragon".
You should point us to books in English language that spell "Aragón" with an accent. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Leaving aside reasons of tradition in printed English, I think that, for practical matters, English speakers are not used to accent marks, and they could simply not find the article if it is renamed. --Jotamar (talk) 01:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Absolute nonsense. What do you think is the purpose of redirects? Anyone typing in Aragon would be redirected to Aragón. By all means argue the merits of an accent or not, but don't, for heaven's sake, introduce patent nonsense into the discussion. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

A search of Google Books, searching for publications in English since 2000, throws up:

A search of Google using similar parameters throws up:

  • From north to south, Aragón consists of Huesca, dominated by the Pyrenees; Saragossa, a preeminently agricultural province; and Teruel, so depopulated and forgotten that its inhabitants have had to launch a campaign with the plaintive slogan "Teruel Exists, Too." from from Spain and Portugal for Visitors
  • Comprising this zone of astounding natural beauty and pretty villages are the autonomous communities of Aragón, Navarra and La Rioja. from What Spain
  • The history of Aragón and the architectural gems that form such a rich part of its heritage are inextricably linked. Aragón is renowned for some of the finest examples of Romanesque and Mudéjar buildings in the world. from Telegraph Media Group
  • The arid hills and proud history of Aragón; the lush coastline and gourmet delights of the Basque Country (País Vasco); the wine country and famous festivals of Navarra: this northeastern area of Spain is brimming with fascinating destinations. from Lonely Planet
  • Comprising the provinces of Huesca, Teruel, and Zaragoza (Saragossa), Aragón includes the southern slopes of the Pyrenees, where the mountains reach their greatest height; a semiarid central plain drained by the Ebro River; and the western fringe of the central plateau of Spain from Credo Reference
  • To the south of the Pyrenees lie the provinces of Aragón, La Rioja, and Navarra, a collage of semi-desert and lush countryside, Mediterranean and Continental climates. from Let's Go Publications
  • The Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for Transportation and Logistics (CTL) and the government of Aragón, Spain, have signed an agreement, extending their partnership — originally due to expire in 2013 — for another 10 years. from Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Aragón makes up 9.42% of Spanish territory. Population density is low in this, the fourth largest of Spain’s autonomous communities, with most of the population concentrated in and around the provincial capitals. from Typically Spanish
  • Aragón has a rich cultural heritage of which cathedrals form an important part. from Caja de Ahorros de la Inmaculada de Aragón
  • Comprising the provinces of Huesca, Teruel, and Zaragoza (Saragossa), Aragón includes the southern slopes of the Pyrenees, where the mountains reach their greatest height; a semiarid central plain drained by the Ebro River; and the western fringe of the central plateau of Spain. Much of the region is sparsely populated and desertlike. Irrigation works, started by the Moors, were resumed in the 16th cent.; the two lateral canals of the Ebro are the most important. In the oases and irrigated areas cereals, grapes, olives, and sugar beets are grown. Sheep are raised throughout Aragón, and cattle in the Pyrenees. Machinery, electrical appliances, and industrial vehicles are manufactured, and iron, sulfur, and lignite are mined. from Yahoo Education
  • You cannot know Spain unless you know Aragón, that former kingdom rich in fine landscape, history and architecture, including Arab works and the Arab-Christian style known as Mudéjar, here at its most extravagant and surprising. from Martin Randall Travel]
  • The region of Aragón is characterised by a strong industrial tradition with over a quarter of the workforce still employed in industrial sectors which are by and large in mature markets with declining demand and traditional technology. from European Commission
  • In 1076, Aragón annexed Navarre, and in 1137 it became united, through personal union, with Catalonia. from Columbia Encyclopedia

Skinsmoke (talk) 05:17, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that you performed this search? That gives less than 400 books, and most of them seem to be in Spanish. The point is that the inmense majority of books in English don't use an accent. --Enric Naval (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you prove the sweeping assertion that "the inmense[sic] majority of books in English don't use an accent."? With a reliable source of course. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Nope, I can't "prove" it, but you can search "aragon" with no accent, with filter set to books in English language, and count yourself how many have an accent and how many don't (there some in Spanish language). In my post above I made several searches and I found something like 95% books that used no accent. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

History[edit]

The history section needs some serious attention to style.

There is a big gap in history between 1808 and the 20th cent. Spanish Civil War.

The entire section (as well as much of the rest of the article) needs footnotes. Vereverde (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Is "Aragon" still an English exonym?[edit]

The article lede gives Aragon as the only English spelling and then "(Spanish: Aragón)". Is this accurate, or is it WP:OR. What evidence exists that Aragón is not used in 21st C English texts to refer to the modern Spanish autonomous community? Put another way, what evidence exists that this is like Zurich (the French name used in English as an exonym in quality English sources) and not a case like "Gottingen" (sic) the German endonym mispelled in low quality English sources.

What we need is sources that meet these 2 criteria: (i) give Spanish accents generally, (ii) observe firm exonyms like Catalonia". Only if a source meets both (i) + (ii) will it be reliable to determine whether the best English sources use Aragón or deliberately de-accent to Aragon while retaining accents on other words.

A. Enabled English sources which treat "Aragón" as a Spanish endonym[edit]

  • Anthony Ham, Damien Simonis, Sarah Andrews Discover Spain - 2010 Page 166 "DISCOVER CATALONIA & ARAGÓN From the Mediterranean coves of the Costa Brava to the high summits of the Pyrenees, Catalonia and Aragón encompass some of Spain's most dramatic scenery."
  • Benjamin Keen, Keith Haynes A History of Latin America: Ancient America To 1910 2008 Page 40 "over three states — Aragón, Valencia, and Catalonia—each regarded as a separate reino (kingdom) and each having its own Cortes. The upland state of Aragón was the poorest and most backward of the three."
  • Omar Guillermo Encarnación Spanish Politics: Democracy After Dictatorship 2008 Page 170 "The Kingdom of Aragón was comprised of Aragón, Catalonia, Valencia, and Majorca. Of the four Hispanic kingdoms that existed at the end of the sixteenth century (Castile, Aragón, Portugal, and Navarra), Aragón was the second largest"
Note "Aragón, Catalonia, Valencia, and Majorca" [endonym, exonym, exonym, exonym]

B. Enabled English sources which treat "Aragon" as an English exonym[edit]

I just ran a check on English sources using [-Aragón Aragon Alcañiz, Spain] and got 1 hit:

  • Joseph F. O'Callaghan A History of Medieval Spain 1975 Page 544 "While Catalonia remained relatively calm, factionalism was rampant in Aragon and Valencia. Rival parties met in rival parliaments in 1411 at Alcañiz and Mequinenza in Aragon, at Vinaroz and Traiguera in Valencia."
Result: Aragon is deliberately left accentless even though Alcañiz is spelled in Spanish.

That is the methodology. Now the test. How many post 2000 sources dealing with the modern autonomous community (not the medieval entity) fall into group A. how many into group B.? In ictu oculi (talk) 06:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Disagree with methodology[edit]

That's not the test per WP:COMMONNAME: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. There's no requirement to check that the source uses accents generally but specifically leaves it out in the case of Aragon. (And btw, that artificially loads it to "finding" that that's a rarity and the accent should be used.) The requirement is to establish what is used per WP:COMMONNAME and press and media most likely will be the biggest source for that. Without doing any research, I'll make a good bet that the diacritic is rarely used. Outside of that, the other big English language source for the word is part of the name Catherine of Aragon - and I bet it's rarely used there too. DeCausa (talk) 07:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi DeCausa,
Re the definition of "reliable" it must include. WP:RS "reliable for the statement being made"
Re WP:COMMONNAME, WP COMMONNAME Bill Clinton (not William Jefferson Clinton) is not relevant to distinguishing "Emily Brontë" vs "Emily Bronte." If we put "Bill Clinton" vs "William Jefferson Clinton" into Google Books you easily get a correct answer. If we put a typographical issue like "Emily Brontë" vs "Emily Bronte" into Google Books all we get is an assessment of how many Google Books have modern fonts. That doesn't tell us anything. The methodology above is a normal pre-selective methodology for observing any sample; such as when judging "is this rose red or yellow" we first exclude black and white photos. So the question we need to be establishing here is not "How common is Emily Brontë in books without the letter ë" but "How common is Emily Brontë in Books that can give us a reading between (i) Brontë and (ii) Bronte." This is pretty basic.
Whether someone actually wants to apply the methodology is a different issue. We could (I see you are in London) reach the conclusion "Emily Brontë is used in 90% of enabled sources like The Times and The Guardian, but The Times and The Guardian are only 10% of total UK source pool, The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Express, The Mail all have Emily Bronte, so we will use The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Express, The Mail because our aim as an encyclopedia is to duplicate majority sources, right or wrong."
Catherine of Aragon relates to Kingdom of Aragon article but has zero bearing on this article which is, according to the lede, supposedly about the EU autonomous community. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:41, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Btw DeCausa, you are not obliged to accept the result of quality printed sources, but you can't fairly I think prevent them from being looked at. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:44, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Completely disagree. "reliable for the statement made" in this case means reliable as a source for evidencing common usage not reliable as a source evidencing the accuracy of the spelling. Your methodology pre-selects sources to support the use of the diacritic because it amounts to the following false logic: Q. What is a "reliable source" for using diacritics? A. A source that uses diacritics. Q. Of those, do they use diacritics for this word? A. Yes. QED. But that's completely the wrong approach. It's utterly irrelevant whether the source habitually uses diacritics, and there is no basis in policy for that position. For such a radical leap away from policy I think you need to take that to Village pump etc before trying it here. (bt, Aragon is simply a place-name, hence Catherine of Aragon, Ferdinand of Aragon etc is of course relevant. DeCausa (talk) 09:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

De Causa, Okay, that more or less challenges me to produce evidence of what en.wp's Spain articles do. Maybe most appropriate is to try a test on University of Oñati an article you yourself created:

See my point? Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I didn't check the commonality of the diacritic in that case - because I don't actually think it's an especially significant issue and I didn't think about it much. I had a sense that Oñati was more common than Onati in English language literature - mainly because I've only seen it that way. Truth is neither Oñati or Onati is often referred to (so I suspect there is a low statistical sample to base any conclusion on). However, the important point is that if someone could be bothered to go to that article's talk page with evidence that Onati was more common than Oñati (such as you have) I wouldn't object to a page move. For me, the essence of WP:COMMONNAME is what spelling would the English-language reader most likely reconise from seeing the name previously? DeCausa (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Well, no worries, no hurry, perhaps you might want to take a look around en.wp and think about it a bit, you might find your first gut feeling about University of Oñati was right (it's a nice article by the way). WP:COMMONNAME isn't actually the relevant part of WP:AT anyway. That will tell us about WP:UCN "The Hague (not 's-Gravenhage)" but the section about accents is further down the page at WP:UE "English-language usage, e.g., Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen, but Nuremberg, delicatessen, and Florence." Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen will appear as Besancon, Soren Kierkegaard and Gottingen in Daily Express MOS, just as University of Oñati will be Onati in Daily Express MOS. That isn't what WP:COMMONNAME is about.
Back to this page. Adding "autonomous" as an indicator of modern reference indicates the majority of enabled sources treating Aragon the same as León‎, as an endonym, a minority treating Aragon as different from León‎, as an exonym:
Different tests would need to be run to get an overall picture. But that quick test already demonstrated Aragon is not being treated as an English exonym in 2/3 of this run of enabled English sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
PS, I didn't acknowledge your point. No, correct, obviously not. The Q here is instead: Q. What is a "reliable source" for distinguishing endonyms and exonyms? A. A source that can distinguish exonyms and endonyms. Nothing else. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 12:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
I don't think they are the right searches. Compare:
Aragón -Aragon: 4,910,000 results which are predominantly Spanish language looking through the first pages.
Aragon -Aragón: 8,320,000 results, all English.
Endonym v. exonym is a red herring. The only issue is how it is commonly spelled in the English language sources. This has been widely discussed in many places including Jimbo's talk page and WP:COMMONNAME is clearly the central policy on this issue. To say "That isn't what WP:COMMONNAME is about." is plain wrong. DeCausa (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Btw, you mis-read WP:UE. It says: "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage, e.g., Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen, but Nuremberg, delicatessen, and Florence." The sentence is making an assumption that Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen are English-language usage in those specific cases, not that diacritics are "English-language usage" per se and effectively repeats WP:COMMONAME. DeCausa (talk) 12:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi again
Re your searches, yes you have demonstrated that most English books don't use Spanish accents. I have never heard anyone claim they do.
Re the relevance of endonyms and exonyms we don't have to apply them, but we do recognise that endonyms and exonyms exist.
Also I appreciate that you didn't dispute the point that WP:UE "Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen" are not found in the Daily Express.
Yes its possible that someone reading the guideline might well think that Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard and Göttingen aren't typical.
But if they aren't then where are the articles equivalent to Besancon, Soren Kierkegaard and Gottingen? Do you know of any?
Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Whether it is an endonym or exonym is irrelevant - and you will not be able to point to a policy that makes them relevant. "you have demonstrated that most English books don't use Spanish accents. I have never heard anyone claim they do." That statement by you means that in terms of Wikipedia policy on this there is nothing further for us to discuss and the title to this article would not change. But for the record, English usage is inconsistent in the application of foreign diacritics. I have, for example, never seen Besançon spelt Besancon. Besançon reflects English usage, Besancon doesn't. (I've no idea what the Daily Express does, but I'd be surprised if they spelt it Besancon.) French and German diacritics are often used, Spanish less so. It is a case-by-case question. I'm sorry - I see (from your history) you know these arguments well as you are an "old hand" at the long-standing diacritics argument. I truly think this is a waste of time and we would both be more constructively deployed writing and expanding articles. I don't think I have anything else to say on the subject, and I certainly see no consensus to change. DeCausa (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

DeCausa, I am constructively deployed writing and expanding articles thanks. However, I'm looking at this article because it appears to be the only 1x article on en.wp which does not have the name used in high MOS English print sources in the lede. I ran the endonym/exonym check in English Google Books to verify that. And the result is that the article lede is not in line with high MOS English print sources. For me that is what is of interest. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

That's just not true - the search you carried out was artificially loaded to produce the result you desired. The numbers of your search were tiny and irrelevant. Aragon is the standard and overwhelmingly common English language spelling, as over 8 million Google books results show.DeCausa (talk) 17:51, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
DeCausa, at this point I'm going to ask you to tone down your language: "artificially loaded to produce the result you desired" is offensive, a personal attack and an insult. A perfectly clear and normative linguistic methodology was followed and the results are transparent. It doesn't require this kind of response. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
There's no logical basis to it. The parameter of the search you made is pre-selected to ensure a high return of sources using diacritics. It's surprising that using that parameter there were any returns omitting the accent from the word - those that do must have been in the nature of an error, virtually typos. DeCausa (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
DeCausa,
Please re-read the explanation above that was given with the search run.
The parameter of the search (sources which generally use Spanish accents) was pre-selected to determine what proportion of sources which generally use Spanish accents also use them for Aragon.
The purpose and parameter of the search was clearly explained and does not require this emotive language.
And no, in a sample size of 1,443 printed sources delimited by "autonomous" and "León" 36.7% is not "in the nature of an error, virtually typos." - it indicates that 36.7% of those 1,443 printed sources 73.3% consider Aragón an endonym, ‎while 36.7% consider "Aragon" a deliberate English exonym. That amount of divergence in a sample of 1,443 indicates a real difference of practice/opinion.
As I said the search to establish use in sources which generally use Spanish accents excludes sources with no Spanish accents. i.e excluding 2,310x low MOS sources: autonomous Aragon -Aragón -León‎ Leon Spain -Wikipedia -LLC
  • 2,310 English sources not enabled for Spanish.
  • 1,443 English sources enabled for Spanish accents.
By WP:RS "sources reliable for the statement being made" the 2,310 sources, 61% of total sources, which use no Spanish at all are not reliable sources for determining how Aragon/Aragón is represented in English sources enabled for Spanish accents.
This is all a repeat of explanation which was previously given. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:31, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, we're going round in circles. Other than to say you are wrong in logic and policy. I'm done here. DeCausa (talk) 06:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Propose addition to lede[edit]

I suggest to add "Aragon or Aragón (Spanish Aragón..." to the lede per results of high MOS English print sources 1050x results for "autonomous" + Aragón as endonym vs. 388x results for "autonomous" + Aragon as exonym. This shows that high MOS English print sources do spell Aragón the same as Castellón‎, León‎, Cádiz‎ etc. and the lede should reflect WP:RS "sources reliable for the statement being made". Does anyone object? In ictu oculi (talk) 16:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

That's just silly. There's no point in having "Aragón" twice in the same line. It's not New York, New York. It's quite clear to the reader what the "proper" Spanish name is already. Bold it if you prefer - but it just looks ridiculous having the same word twice. Now please stop this. DeCausa (talk) 17:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
"Aragon (/ˈærəɡɒn/ or /ˈærəɡən/, and in Spanish and Aragonese, Aragón " would be fine. DeCausa (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary, where genuine (non-typographic limitation) spelling variations exist then normal guideline is to have both. If you look around en.wp you will find various examples. In this case in the sources presented the more common English name is the endonym "Aragón," but there are a significant minority of Spanish-enabled sources deliberately treating as an exonym and spelling "Aragon." The sources are linked above. Anyone familiar with this area will recognise the difference between exonymic usage and a typographic limitation. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

As I said above, we're going round in circles. And as stated above, other than to say you are wrong in logic and policy. I'm done here.
  • There should "name" section for this sort of thing, not a long list of names in the opening. Kauffner (talk) 08:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Summary[edit]

Based on searching 3,748 modern English GB sources using "autonomous" and "Leon/León‎" as delimiters, autonomous Aragon -Aragón -León‎ Leon Spain -Wikipedia -LLC = 2,310x results, autonomous -Aragon Aragón León‎ -Leon Spain -Wikipedia -LLC = 1050x results vs autonomous Aragon -Aragón León‎ -Leon Spain -Wikipedia -LLC = 388x results indicates that on this sample 61% of total sources use no Spanish accents at all, 28% use Aragón as an endonym, 10% use Aragon as an exonym. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

No that's not a summary. That's simply a repetition of your incorrect view. Over 8 million returns on Google books in the English language show the word without the accent. 4 million with the accent - but almost all in Spanish. That's the relevant data. DeCausa (talk) 10:40, 19 December 2012 (UTC)